396 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
lay his foot on the ground. He was a whistler, and made more 
noise than a band of music. 
John Connor took the horse to a farrier the day after he was 
brought home to the plaintiff. He was very lame. The plaintiff 
offered the defendant £10 if he took back the horse ; but the de¬ 
fendant said he would take him back at no price: the horse was 
afterwards sold for <£18. 
Turner, a farrier, deposed that there was a splint and a con¬ 
traction in one of the horse’s legs. 
Mr. Earle addressed the Jury for the defendant, observing 
that he should shew that the horse was sold without a warranty. 
William Sewel was present at the bargain for the horse, when 
the defendant said he would not warrant him; as he was a whistler 
he would sell him as he was. “ When the bill which the plaintiff 
gave became due, I took it to him for payment. He said he had 
no money; and at my request he gave another bill, payable in 
two months. 1 did not hear him complain of the horse until 
afterwards.” 
Mr. Baron Parke told the Jury, that the question was, whether 
there was a warranty except as to the wind of the horse. If 
they thought there was, the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict. 
When a horse was sold with a warranty, he became the property 
of the buyer, who might retain him, and bring an action against 
the seller for the difference between that horse, if unsound, 
and a sound horse ; but the usual way, when the buyer dis¬ 
covered the horse to be unsound, was to send him to a livery stable, 
and give notice to the seller, or send him back to the seller. It 
was material for their consideration, that, when the first bill be¬ 
came due, the plaintiff renewed it without making any objection 
as to the unsoundness of the horse. The inference which his 
Lordship would draw from this was, that he did not consider he 
had any claim on the defendant on the ground of warranty. 
The Jury having deliberated for two hours, returned a verdict 
for the plaintiff—Damages £24. 
The Times , June 12th, 1834. 
* ♦' • < ♦ * * • _ 
We insert the above report, partly because it contains some 
useful information as to the course to be pursued in these sup¬ 
posed breaches of warranty ; but more as a specimen of the 
wretched manner in which these horse causes are reported. It 
so happens, that this “ Turner, a farrier,” was our truly excellent 
Mr Tamoo Tnrnov r\f U onrnnf Sfroof • anrl 
